Username: Password:

Author Topic: Mule/MQ set?  (Read 4466 times)

indysmith

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 4713
    • Soundcloud
Mule/MQ set?
« on: September 16, 2008, 12:17:43 PM »
Does anyone have a Mule/MQ set?
I was pretty much decided on that for my Edwards LP, but _tom_ reckons that the MQ won't balance as it is too loud in the neck for a Mule in the bridge? He said that even the Pig90 has trouble keeping up :o
The D.C. ratings seem to balance nicely, but obviously that doesn't represent the true 'loudness' of a pickup.
I definitely want a MQ in the neck - but is there another bridge humbucker that would balance better with it? I really wanted to keep within the 'vintage' kind of output levels if possible.
Thanks
LOVING the Mules!

Philly Q

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 18109
Re: Mule/MQ set?
« Reply #1 on: September 16, 2008, 12:31:31 PM »
I think someone has a Riff Raff and MQ, so the Mule shouldn't be far behind I'd have thought.  And more than one person has a Black Dog/MQ combo.

Maybe you could get the MQ slightly underwound to be on the safe side?
BKPs I've Got:  RR, BKP-91, ITs, VHII, CS set, Emeralds
BKPs I Had:  RY+Abraxas, Crawlers, BD+SM

Twinfan

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 10528
Re: Mule/MQ set?
« Reply #2 on: September 16, 2008, 01:07:57 PM »
MQs are hot and will overpower a lot of 'buckers.  I would ask Tim and the boys for a low-wind MQ to match with the bridge 'bucker of your choice.

indysmith

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 4713
    • Soundcloud
Re: Mule/MQ set?
« Reply #3 on: September 16, 2008, 01:31:56 PM »
Thanks guys - looks like an underwound MQ is definitely on the cards.
Any idea why it's so hot? If i hadn't been told I'd have assumed the 7K neck MQ would match fine with the 8.4K bridge Mule!
LOVING the Mules!

Philly Q

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 18109
Re: Mule/MQ set?
« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2008, 01:45:23 PM »
Maybe it's something to do with inductance (... he says in total ignorance, just plucking a word out of the air...  :oops: ).

No seriously, perhaps it's just because single coils are more "open" and don't cancel any frequencies?  So a powerful single coil sounds "bigger" (albeit brighter) than a low-output humbucker with similar DC resistance?

But I'm making this up as I go along to be honest...
BKPs I've Got:  RR, BKP-91, ITs, VHII, CS set, Emeralds
BKPs I Had:  RY+Abraxas, Crawlers, BD+SM

HTH AMPS

  • Middleweight
  • *****
  • Posts: 5649
    • HTH AMPS
Re: Mule/MQ set?
« Reply #5 on: September 16, 2008, 01:56:06 PM »
Its that whole resonant peak issue that'll make it sound LOUD - if the MQ has a strong peak around 6k it'll be pokey as hell.  The Pig90 will likely have a lower resonant peak (maybe 5k???) so wouldn't cut quite so much.

Tim would be the one to offer a better explanation on all this.

Twinfan

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 10528
Re: Mule/MQ set?
« Reply #6 on: September 16, 2008, 01:57:35 PM »
I think it's to do with the low end of a P90?  They always sound thick and powerful compared to PAF types.

Yamhammer

  • Guest
Mule/MQ set
« Reply #7 on: September 16, 2008, 03:56:27 PM »
Why not going for a calibrated set of MQ's?

« Last Edit: December 08, 2008, 02:58:28 AM by Yamhammer »

Elliot

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 2418
Re: Mule/MQ set?
« Reply #8 on: September 16, 2008, 04:00:55 PM »
I had a Alnico IV MQ neck, Alnico IV Mule bridge combo in my Esprit and never found the problems discussed above - there was a slight - and I mean slight - drop in volume for the neck pickup, but nothing that would not be within the range of normal pickups.
BKPS: Milks, P90s, Apaches, Mississippi Queens, Mules, PG Blues, BG FP 50s, e.60s strat custom set

Yamhammer

  • Guest
Re: Mule/MQ set?
« Reply #9 on: September 16, 2008, 04:16:01 PM »
LOL!
« Last Edit: December 08, 2008, 02:57:49 AM by Yamhammer »

il˙ti

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1325
Re: Mule/MQ set?
« Reply #10 on: September 16, 2008, 04:25:09 PM »
Why do so many of the forum members have a totally wrong idea about the MQ bridge pickup?! They're not calibrated without a reason. If you want balls, cut and clarity (without  compression) I'd say just go for it. It's trebly, close to the RY bridge pickup + it has a lovely, raw and strong bass response you won't get out of any humbucker. VERY sensitive to pick attack, the harder you hit, the 'rockier' the sound becomes. I love the fact that they stay clean at high volumes without unwanted drive/compression. It's such an underrated pickup to my opinion.
What do you mean? I've never seen anyone contradict that it has those qualities. Some people just prefer the sound of a humbucker over a P-90 in the bridge position, I don't think it has to do with having the "wrong idea" of what the MQ bridge sounds like.
« Last Edit: September 16, 2008, 04:27:46 PM by il˙ti »
Crawlers, Mule-7s
The Danish parliament is working on an official apology for Lars Ulrich

Yamhammer

  • Guest
Re: Mule/MQ set?
« Reply #11 on: September 16, 2008, 04:57:52 PM »
Why do so many of the forum members have a totally wrong idea about the MQ bridge pickup?! They're not calibrated without a reason. If you want balls, cut and clarity (without  compression) I'd say just go for it. It's trebly, close to the RY bridge pickup + it has a lovely, raw and strong bass response you won't get out of any humbucker. VERY sensitive to pick attack, the harder you hit, the 'rockier' the sound becomes. I love the fact that they stay clean at high volumes without unwanted drive/compression. It's such an underrated pickup to my opinion.
What do you mean? I've never seen anyone contradict that it has those qualities. Some people just prefer the sound of a humbucker over a P-90 in the bridge position, I don't think it has to do with having the "wrong idea" of what the MQ bridge sounds like.

True, but not all P-90's are the same (same story goes for humbuckers). Why not trying the MQ bridge pickup first before having 1 opinion about ALL P-90's?

I've had Mules, Blackdogs and RY's but the MQ's (6,4K/7,0K) are by far my favorite of them all. It really isn''t a huge change, going from those humbuckers to these 'P-90 type MQ's'. Everything is still there, but it's just more alive/more sensitive to pick attack.
« Last Edit: September 16, 2008, 05:04:20 PM by Yamhammer »

il˙ti

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1325
Re: Mule/MQ set?
« Reply #12 on: September 16, 2008, 06:44:57 PM »
True, but not all P-90's are the same (same story goes for humbuckers). Why not trying the MQ bridge pickup first before having 1 opinion about ALL P-90's?
That isn't what I'm saying either. I know that are many kinds of P-90s, but they have their distinct sound (in the same way that humbuckers, strat single coils, filtertrons, single-sized humbuckers etc have their own sound) and that just isn't always what the player wants, even though he does want a P-90 sound in the neck position. There's other reasons for wanting a different pickup than the MQ than just ignorance of how it sounds.

(just for the record, you're totally selling me the MQ as we speak :oops:)
Crawlers, Mule-7s
The Danish parliament is working on an official apology for Lars Ulrich

WezV

  • Middleweight
  • *****
  • Posts: 5838
    • http://wezvenables.co.uk
Re: Mule/MQ set?
« Reply #13 on: September 16, 2008, 08:37:27 PM »
i have a manhattan/mule combo in my main guitar - extremely versatile and well matched!

a manhattan wouldnt be far off an underwound MQ - i think its under 6k.  cant remember if the magnets are different to an MQ or not

il˙ti

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1325
Re: Mule/MQ set?
« Reply #14 on: September 16, 2008, 08:39:22 PM »
i have a manhattan/mule combo in my main guitar - extremely versatile and well matched!

a manhattan wouldnt be far off an underwound MQ - i think its under 6k.  cant remember if the magnets are different to an MQ or not
Manhattan has Alnico III magnets. I remember a semi-long post about the effect of this from awhile ago but I can't find it.
Crawlers, Mule-7s
The Danish parliament is working on an official apology for Lars Ulrich